Jump to content

$5700 what canon camera do I buy?


omar
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, jasonmillard81 said:

The scamster never replied.  I gave up.  

 

Question though, second hand used c100 II can be had in the 2000s....is it worth waiting around for one to be sold in NY or is it worth getting brand new?  I do not know much about the pros/cons.  Any insight?

I would look for a used one from BH. For some reason you cannot return new ones, but you can return used ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2016 at 4:38 PM, jasonmillard81 said:

IronFilm I am curious about your thoughts!!!!

 

 Question 1: Also, Omar et. al:  any reason you'd prefer to buy a brand new c100 II vs. used?  I live in Queens NY and have seen a few for sale 1500-2000 on craigslist.  Anything I should be aware of?  Seems like a much better deal.  If I get it for 2000 and buy a 24-105 for 900 then i'd save 1500 from BH.

 

Question 2:  If you got a c100 I with DPAF is the detail/ISO performance much better on a c100 II?

I usually buy used but since the c100 mk II was selling brand new for $3600 I made the plunge. Didn't see me saving that much on a used one.

Also, people that buy these cameras usually don't sell them. Plus I needed the camera for some upcoming shoots so didn't really have time to wait around. 

And be extra careful with scams. If it's too good to be true then it always is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/10/2016 at 0:54 AM, jasonmillard81 said:

The scamster never replied.  I gave up.  

 

Question though, second hand used c100 II can be had in the 2000s....is it worth waiting around for one to be sold in NY or is it worth getting brand new?  I do not know much about the pros/cons.  Any insight?

He was probably busy scattering magic beans from his flying carpet at 30,000ft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On October 11, 2016 at 10:26 AM, omar said:

Thank guys! I know I said I want to stick with canon but I kind have some interest towards the FS5. What do you think about the FS5 over the c100 mkii?

I had terrible results with then FS5---after shooting Sony for 10 years, the image and color of the FS5 finally convinced me I should move to Canon.

IMO you would be VERY unhappy with the FS5.

If you do corporate videos if I were you with your $$$ I buy 1 XC15 and 1 XC10, use the XC15 as an A cam with the XLRs, and use the XC10 as a B cam and buy a fig rig. That would be an awesome combination creating a LOT of variety of image and perspective. 

None of the cameras you mentioned have 4k and beauty and color of image that the XC10/XC15 have. If you'll look at Reid's review of the XC10 comments you'll find an image matching of the XC15 and C300 M2 I just did, shooting both in C-log. There you can see just how good the XC15/XC10 is in color. Plus, the C100 Mk2 doesn't have anything close to the robustness of the image quality of the XC10.

If you get the C100 Mk Ii you MUST get an Atmos Ninja Star to be able to record a robust image that you can grade without falling apart. 

the XC15 is so superior, and the XLR attachment audio quality is excellent.

By the way, I've owned everyone of these cams and shot a lot. For doing what you're doing I'd definitely take the XC15/10. Just light the interviews well and you're good to go and the image quality is lovely! FS5---Sony colors are awful! AWFUL!

Canon is frustrating in many ways, but they are vastly superior to Sony in their color science, especially for skin tone. And I'm not alone in this opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jasonmillard81 said:

I am by no means a pro let alone a decent amateur.  However, to my average eye I find the XC footage to be lackluster and less desirable than an FS5.  I also don't think it remotely comes close to the image of the c100 Mark I.

 

Is that just me/?

My experience with the fs5 was the last straw after 10 years with Sony--and growing. The skin tones looked artificial and over processed---never attractive. And the horrible magenta made me crazy.  And then S-log is a nightmare to grades--LUTS everywhere and they all look like crap. 

The 100 mk2 is a fine cam, but the 4k of the XC10 is much, much better, clean and clear with C300 Mk II  colors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@tomsemiterrific, again I know you've argued that point enthusiastically but my opinion still stands that I've yet to see footage from the xc10/xc15 that compares to the c100II.  You've also said it has c300 II colors which I completely disagree with but if you're happy with that system that is what matters most.  I, as a viewer of content and consumer of electronics prefer the look of other canon C cameras.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, jasonmillard81 said:

@tomsemiterrific, again I know you've argued that point enthusiastically but my opinion still stands that I've yet to see footage from the xc10/xc15 that compares to the c100II.  You've also said it has c300 II colors which I completely disagree with but if you're happy with that system that is what matters most.  I, as a viewer of content and consumer of electronics prefer the look of other canon C cameras.

 

 

In the end the operator and colorist will make this, or any, footage look good or not. I have seen great c100 footage and horrible c100 footage. I have recorded good XC10 footage and horrible XC10 footage. For the price, the XC10 is a great camera, and if you really look there is great XC10 footage floating around... A lot of which is in the XC10 threads on this site.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, jasonmillard81 said:

@tomsemiterrific, again I know you've argued that point enthusiastically but my opinion still stands that I've yet to see footage from the xc10/xc15 that compares to the c100II.  You've also said it has c300 II colors which I completely disagree with but if you're happy with that system that is what matters most.  I, as a viewer of content and consumer of electronics prefer the look of other canon C cameras.

 

 

Also you have to remember that the XC10/15 records 4:22 broadcast quality 4K footage in camera, plus 4:22 1080p. The C100 will only record 4:20 1080p footage in camera. So, technically the XC10/15 has better color than the C100 and matches the C300s capabilities... If based only on that spec.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow all interesting comments. It's so confusing when picking a camera. Everyone says something different. I do however keep hearing that canon color is the best. That being said, how much better is it? Is it life changing compared to the fs5? Or can you get similar results with the fs5 with some good color grading? 

The xc15 looks like a great cam but I really don't like the permanent lens. Also, the Aperture is  fixed and I really enjoy using primes so xc15 can't be an A cam for me. 

All of this being said, what do you guys think about the ursa mini 4.6k? I hear the new firmware has fixed all of the issues it had before. And from the images I've seen online it's made me consider buying one in the distant future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...